Learn Hardcore Turkish: Avukat, mahkeme uzun sürse bile sakin kalmamızı söyledi. - The lawyer said that even if the trial lasts long, we should stay calm.

The idea is not to state a simple fact like “the trial is lasting a long time” (sürüyor) or “will last a long time” (sürecek), but to express a hypothetical or possible situation:

mahkeme uzun sürse bile
≈ even if the trial lasts a long time / even if the trial ends up being long

So -se here corresponds to English “if / even if” rather than a normal present or future tense.

What is the function of bile in sürse bile? Is it the same as rağmen or -se de?

Bile means “even” and in this construction -se bile means “even if / even though”.

mahkeme uzun sürse bile
= even if the trial lasts long

Related expressions:

-se bile ≈ even if (slightly stronger emphasis)
-se de ≈ even if / although (very similar, a bit less emphatic)
-mesine rağmen ≈ although / despite the fact that

You could say:

Mahkeme uzun sürse de sakin kalmamızı söyledi.
Mahkemenin uzun sürmesine rağmen sakin kalmamızı söyledi.

All are grammatical, but -se bile sounds very natural and puts a bit more stress on the contrast, like: “even in that case, still stay calm.”

How is mahkeme uzun sürse bile structured? Which word is the subject and which is the verb?

Structure:

mahkeme = subject (the court / the trial)
uzun = adjective (long)
sürse = verb in conditional/subjunctive (if it lasts)
bile = particle (even)

So the mini-clause is:

mahkeme (subject)
uzun (adjective modifying the verb’s meaning: last for a long time)
sürse (verb)
bile (adds “even” → even if it lasts long)

Altogether: mahkeme uzun sürse bile = even if the trial lasts long.

What exactly is sakin kalmamızı grammatically? Why not just sakin kal?

Sakin kalmamızı is a nominalized verb phrase acting as the object of söyledi.

Breakdown:

sakin = calm
kal- = stay
kal-ma- = staying (verb stem + verbal noun suffix -ma)
kal-ma-mız = our staying / that we stay (possessive -mız = our)
kal-ma-mız-ı = our staying (as a direct object, accusative -ı)

So sakin kalmamızı roughly means:

our staying calm
that we stay calm

In English you’d usually say “told us to stay calm”, but in Turkish it is more like:

“said our staying calm” → “told us that we should stay calm”

You don’t use sakin kal here because that’s an imperative (“stay calm!”), not a noun-like clause. The verb söylemek in this structure wants a thing / clause as its object, and sakin kalmamızı fills that role.

Why does kalmamızı end with -ı? What is that case marking doing?

The -ı is the accusative case marker, showing that kalmamızı is the direct object of söyledi.

kalmamız = our staying (verbal noun with possessive)
kalmamız-ı = our staying (as something that was “said”)

Compare:

Kitabı okudum. = I read the book.
Sakin kalmamızı söyledi. = (He/She) said our staying calm / told us to stay calm.

So -ı does the same job as on a normal noun: it marks what thing was “said”.

Where is “us” in this Turkish sentence? Why is there no bize?

“Us” is hidden inside the verb form kalmamızı.

kal-ma-mız = our staying
- -mız is the 1st person plural possessive = our / we

So sakin kalmamızı literally encodes “that we stay calm”.

You can optionally add bize:

Avukat, mahkeme uzun sürse bile bize sakin kalmamızı söyledi.

But it’s a bit redundant, because kalmamızı already shows it’s about “we/us”. Both versions are grammatical; the original sentence simply relies on the possessive ending to express “us”.

Why is söyledi used here instead of dedi?

Both demek and söylemek deal with “saying”, but they are used differently.

demek is used mostly:
- with direct quotes
  - “Sakin kalın,” dedi. = He said, “Stay calm.”
- in very short expressions: Ne demek?, Yani demek istiyorum ki…
söylemek is good for:
- reported / indirect speech without direct quotation marks
- when the object is a clause or noun phrase
  - Sakin kalmamızı söyledi. = He said (that) we should stay calm.

In this sentence, söyledi is natural because you’re not giving the lawyer’s exact words; you’re reporting what he said in a more abstract way, using a nominalized clause (sakin kalmamızı) as the object.

Could we say Avukat, mahkeme uzun sürse bile sakin kalın dedi instead? What would be the difference?

Yes, that is grammatical, but the nuance and structure change.

Avukat, mahkeme uzun sürse bile sakin kalın dedi.
- sakin kalın = 2nd person plural imperative (you all stay calm!)
- dedi = said (with a direct command)

This version feels closer to a direct quote:

“Even if the trial lasts long, stay calm,” the lawyer said.

The original sentence:

Avukat, mahkeme uzun sürse bile sakin kalmamızı söyledi.
uses a nominalized object (sakin kalmamızı) with söyledi and sounds more like indirect/reported speech:
The lawyer said that we should stay calm…

Both are correct; the original is slightly more formal and more structurally “embedded” as reported speech.

Why is there a comma after Avukat?

The comma marks off Avukat as the subject and separates it from the rest of the sentence for clarity and natural rhythm:

Avukat, [mahkeme uzun sürse bile sakin kalmamızı söyledi].

In Turkish, commas are often used:

after a short subject when the sentence that follows is a bit longer or complex
to reflect the natural pause in spoken language

You could technically write it without a comma and it would still be understandable, but the comma is stylistically preferred here.

Can the word order be changed, for example: Avukat, sakin kalmamızı, mahkeme uzun sürse bile söyledi?

Turkish word order is flexible, but not every permutation sounds natural.

Avukat, mahkeme uzun sürse bile sakin kalmamızı söyledi.
This is natural and clear.

Your alternative:

Avukat, sakin kalmamızı, mahkeme uzun sürse bile söyledi.
Sounds awkward and unnatural to native speakers. The clause mahkeme uzun sürse bile normally comes before the main clause’s object or at the very beginning, not squeezed in between object and verb.

More natural variations include:

Mahkeme uzun sürse bile, avukat sakin kalmamızı söyledi.
Avukat sakin kalmamızı, mahkeme uzun sürse bile, söyledi. (with both commas, more written/formal)

But the given order is probably the most neutral and smooth.

What is the difference between mahkeme, duruşma, and dava in this context?

All are law-related, but they focus on different things:

mahkeme
- literally: court (the institution, the place, or by extension the trial process)
- here it is understood as the court case / the trial.
duruşma
- a hearing, one session in court
- e.g. one day’s sitting in front of the judge.
dava
- lawsuit, case (the legal dispute itself).

So you might say:

Mahkeme uzun sürse bile… = even if the trial/court process is long…
Duruşma uzun sürse bile… = even if the hearing takes long (that day’s session).
Dava uzun sürse bile… = even if the case drags on for a long time.

Mahkeme is a natural, general choice here.

If I want to say “The lawyer wanted us to stay calm, even if the trial lasts long”, how would I change the sentence?

You mainly need to change söyledi to istedi:

Avukat, mahkeme uzun sürse bile sakin kalmamızı istedi.

Here:

istedi = wanted
sakin kalmamızı = our staying calm / that we stay calm

Everything else stays the same, because sakin kalmamızı can be the object of both söyledi (said that we should stay calm) and istedi (wanted us to stay calm).